Is 1:1 cringeworthy or cool?

[Cpl Steiner]

Fixed a while back. I don't remember which patch introduced this. Definitely oversight on our part the first time around.

This is news to me. Would you care to elaborate? Ages and ages ago I started a thread about this and the suggested fix then was to give more "weight" to KIA than WIA so they are worth proportionately more points. If this was implemented, what weight factor was used?

[theFightingSeabee]

Physical 'guts' don't interest me. It's the John Wayne 'guts' that matters. My men grew up on the Streets of Hama, and died at Anderson Ridge.

[Yair Iny]

This is news to me. Would you care to elaborate? Ages and ages ago I started a thread about this and the suggested fix then was to give more "weight" to KIA than WIA so they are worth proportionately more points. If this was implemented, what weight factor was used?

I seem to recall Steve posting ages ago that KIA "weigh" twice as much as WIA.

[Zatoichi]

In terms of 'added visual detail', I'm all for improvements in vehicle damage modelling, not at all keen on soldier damage modelling, so I'm glad that's the direction BFC have stated they're committed to.

[Kat Johnston]

I certainly care a lot more about casualties in CM:SF than in the previous CM games. I'm not sure how much of it is down to 1:1 modelling though, for me it's more down to the expectation that Blue "should" incur minimal casualties.

I do find it quite painful watching AI-controlled troops assault suicidally (except for "unconventional" troops, couldn't care less about them.) It's the only thing that bugs me about the AI, that it sometimes keeps sending squads one after the other into an area where they're getting murdered. Especially when they're Blue.

[Battlefront.com]

Cpl. Steiner,

It came out with v1.10 when the Marines launched. Here's the line from the ReadMe:

* Seriously-wounded (red disc) soldiers who have not received "buddy aid" (i.e. disappeared) by the end of the game have a 25% chance of becoming KIA in the final tally.

Which is why we are now putting things like this, going forward, in an Addendum in the manual. These things are easily missed when grouped in with bug fixes and minor tweaks, or are forgotten about (v1.10 came out about 10 months ago).

Steve

[Cpl Steiner]

Cpl. Steiner,

It came out with v1.10 when the Marines launched. Here's the line from the ReadMe:

Which is why we are now putting things like this, going forward, in an Addendum in the manual. These things are easily missed when grouped in with bug fixes and minor tweaks, or are forgotten about (v1.10 came out about 10 months ago).

Steve

Steve, thanks for the prompt reply but I don't think you've answered my question.

Using a "weight" system, KIA could be treated as slightly more than 1 casualty and WIA could be treated as slightly less than 1 casualty. If you want KIA to be worth twice as much as WIA then KIA could have a weight of 1.33 and WIA a weight of 0.67. This would mean the following:

3 KIA plus 9 WIA = (3*1.33) + (9*0.67) = 4 + 6 = 10 casualties for VP purposes.

6 KIA plus 6 WIA = (6*1.33) + (6*0.67) = 8 + 4 = 12 casualties for VP purposes.

9 KIA plus 3 WIA = (9*1.33) + (3*0.67) = 12 + 2 = 14 casualies for VP purposes.

This would give the player a tangible incentive to make sure wounded receive buddy aid.

[Dietrich]

Leto']Is 1:1 cringeworthy or cool?

Both.

Seeing each and every man in a squad, and being able to tell what each man is armed with, is cool. Seeing several men hurl grenades at close-by enemy troops while the others in the squad dish out suppressive fire on not-close-by enemy troops is cool.

Seeing two guys crumple to the ground and their squadmates cower is cringeworthy. Seeing a tank take a knock-out hit and only one guy get out and immediately get KIA by a cook-off is cringeworthy.

Not seeing blood and such makes sense to me. Vehicle damage isn't depicted (except for flames when a vehicle brews up), so it's no big deal that infantry wound-age isn't depicted either.

[[hirr]Leto]

Both.

Seeing each and every man in a squad, and being able to tell what each man is armed with, is cool. Seeing several men hurl grenades at close-by enemy troops while the others in the squad dish out suppressive fire on not-close-by enemy troops is cool.

Seeing two guys crumple to the ground and their squadmates cower is cringeworthy. Seeing a tank take a knock-out hit and only one guy get out and immediately get KIA by a cook-off is cringeworthy.

Not seeing blood and such makes sense to me. Vehicle damage isn't depicted (except for flames when a vehicle brews up), so it's no big deal that infantry wound-age isn't depicted either.

Of course, the level of violence could have been much worse if you would have offered a job to a programmer from Quake or Doom III... but this is really not the point here... I find the depiction of war in a game, sometimes too much like war.

It doesn't lessen my enjoyment of the game, but it sometimes makes me a little more hesitant than in my CM days were I could apathetically use the "red wave" command and watch the Russkies eat bullets until there was nothing left but cabbage jello littered around the battlefield.

1:1 is definately more cringeworthy...

Cheers!

Leto

[c3k]

1:1 has added a huge dimension to my gameplay. I find I am unable to leave wounded men; that has tactical implications which CMx1 didn't touch. When my fully loaded AAV's get hit by ATGM's and I see a veritable cloud of red crosses appear, well, my reaction is certainly different than what I had when CMx1 units took big hits.

Regards,

Ken

[Battlefront.com]

Cpl. Steiner,

Steve, thanks for the prompt reply but I don't think you've answered my question.

Then I didn't understand it You asked if Buddy Aid made a difference to the victory calculation, which (as you correctly remember) the game didn't do before version 1.10. But now it does. Casualties which aren't given Buddy Aid have a fairly good chance of becoming KIA, which in turn lowers your score. If you provide Buddy Aid there chances of that happening are decreased, thus having the soldier be registered as a WIA instead. Since WIAs are "worth" more to the victory conditions, you in effect have the ability to influence your score higher through direct action.

How Charles actually weights these things is irrelevant. The point is that if you do Buddy Aid your score should be higher than if you don't. That's the only thing that matters and there is more than one way to achieve that.

If I'm still missing your point, you're going to have to come at it again from a different angle

Steve

[MarkEzra]

Neither "cringeworthy" nor "cool" adequately covers the emotional roller-coaster that has always been CM. Once the 3D battlefield was effectively introduced with CMBO my wargaming mindset of all tactics all the time was ripped away. With a little supine warrior with his cocked leg ever reminding me of the cost of pixel war and my utter willingness to have them pay it, the cold blooded reality of my hobby stood front and center. CMx2 advances my personal appreciation of not only tactics but their cost. Wellington's observation "Nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won" and Sherman's understanding of Courage: "...a perfect sensibility of the measure of danger, and a mental willingness to endure it", better enunciates my appreciation of wargaming CM style.

[Other Means]

{snipped}

If you provide Buddy Aid there chances of that happening are decreased, thus having the soldier be registered as a WIA instead. Since WIAs are "worth" more to the victory conditions, you in effect have the ability to influence your score higher through direct action.

How Charles actually weights these things is irrelevant. The point is that if you do Buddy Aid your score should be higher than if you don't. That's the only thing that matters and there is more than one way to achieve that.

Steve

How much does it effect the scores?

I know the approach to SF is "do the right things to win and you should win" rather than CM1s "count what you've lost to calculate whether you'll win" but I enjoyed CM1s more easily understood system better.

By giving places visible and easily understood victory conditions I could plan my attack to take what I wanted to win.

I don't see this as cheap. I think in a war a commander would have an idea of what he really needs to achieve to win and plan accordingly. I want to do the same.

If I'm given a scenario now where there's too many places to take in the time/with the men I don't know where to channel my effort.

WIA/KIA (MIA?) counts just as much. How many men can I afford to lose to still win this?

By knowing that the scenario designer can give me tactical conundrums I've got to solve. Right now we don't have enough information to be able to judge correctly.

ESP notwithstanding

[dan/california]

It really comes down to good briefings. If you need to keep casualties to an absolute minimum the briefing should emphasize maintaining your forces effectiveness for later action. If it says that the current mission has absolute priority and you can expect to stand down on its completion that leads to a very different approach.

[Other Means]

It really comes down to good briefings. If you need to keep casualties to an absolute minimum the briefing should emphasize maintaining your forces effectiveness for later action. If it says that the current mission has absolute priority and you can expect to stand down on its completion that leads to a very different approach.

The scenario designers don't know either. They can assign rough measurements to them but lack of information hamstrings them more than a player.

[Cpl Steiner]

If I'm still missing your point, you're going to have to come at it again from a different angle

Nope, I think you've understood it perfectly - and have now answered it perfectly too. I wasn't aware that Charles had coded the game to distinguish between KIA and WIA in the victory point calculations. I thought he'd just put in a percentage chance of "red" casualties turning "brown" if untreated, but that they were basically all worth the same - i.e. 1 casualty.

Thanks for clearing this up.

[LukeFF]

Casualties which aren't given Buddy Aid have a fairly good chance of becoming KIA, which in turn lowers your score. If you provide Buddy Aid there chances of that happening are decreased, thus having the soldier be registered as a WIA instead. Since WIAs are "worth" more to the victory conditions, you in effect have the ability to influence your score higher through direct action.

Do soldiers flagged at WIA at the end of a campaign mission have the chance to return in a later mission?

[dan/california]

Soldiers who are lightly wounded, with the yellow base, will return. I am not sure if they get better or not. I don't think there is any possibility to get "red base" casualties back.

[Field Marshal Blücher]

I don't think there is any possibility to get "red base" casualties back.

Yes there is. In fact, you can get "brown base" casualties back if the campaign designer so desires.

[Wodin]

I really enjoy the infantry experience far more than I did with the older games.

Hopefully things like formation my be added at a later date.

At the moment I still view the game as if the infantry are still abstracted. This works for me and stops me getting frustrated.

[dan/california]

Yes there is. In fact, you can get "brown base" casualties back if the campaign designer so desires.

http://wwwdelivery.superstock.com/WI/223/1555/PreviewComp/SuperStock_1555R-139096.jpg

From a game standpoint aren't those replacements as opposed to healed troopers? I realize it doesn't matter if you just want a filled out squad.

[Field Marshal Blücher]

From a game standpoint aren't those replacements as opposed to healed troopers? I realize it doesn't matter if you just want a filled out squad.

Yes. I guess it depends on how you define "get them back." You don't get the exact same guy back, but you do fill his slot in the squad.

[dan/california]

The picture link in my next post above was supposed to go in the refresh thread. Just so you know.

[sfhand]

Leto;1144735']

1:1 is definately more cringeworthy...

Cheers!

Leto

Which makes it more cool, IMHO... so my answer is both! Anytime you want a PBEM let me know; anytime after the release of 1.2 that is...

[[hirr]Leto]

Which makes it more cool, IMHO... so my answer is both! Anytime you want a PBEM let me know; anytime after the release of 1.2 that is...

After Elvis, you are second on the dance card when 1.2 comes out.

: )

Cheers!

Leto